Hi Manuranga, Looking forward to having a chat with you on this
It would be pleasure to have a chat with you guys. > One option is to limit to only 2-lavels IMO a framework should not have such restrictions. I have very bad experience in JSF where you couldn't have custom HTML tags. Instead of putting restrictions; we can publish a doc for best practices and Do's and Dont's for the mentioned framework. whether the name of the unit depends on the category I think it is up to developer to choose a categorical name for the unit category. For instance; category is "device", units can be "mobile", "arduino", "raspberry-pi" etc. Thank you On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Manuranga Perera <[email protected]> wrote: > awesome. > >> could learn 80-90% of the architecture >> > very happy to hear this. > > Ruchira, Dulitha and I were also discussing about adding categorizes, the > biggest concern was maybe it'll make things more complex. One option is to > limit to only 2-lavels. > Another thing we have to think is, whether the name of the unit depends on > the category. > > eg: > > {{unit "categoryA.unitB"}} > > Looking forward to having a chat with you on this. > > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 8:21 PM, Rasika Perera <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Folks, >> >> Sorry for jumping into this thread like coming from nowhere. I also tried >> a sample jaggery app using Unified UI Framework. For the above purpose I >> referred MDM app as a sample and could learn 80-90% of the architecture(As >> I think) within about 10-15 minutes. As a complete new guy; I could mention >> that Unified UI framework is "very productive" and has a very "short >> learning curve". >> >> As also Prabath mentioned; When an App grows it needs a way to organize >> corresponding UI bits across various zones. For instance; >> >> app >> | >> |-----pages >> | |----index.hbs >> | |----about.hbs >> | `----login.hbs >> | >> |-----layouts >> | >> |-----*units *<------ this can have "N" >> number of units >> | | >> | |-------unitA >> | |-------unitB >> | | |------public >> | | | |----images >> | | | |-----js >> | | | `-----css >> | | | >> | | |------unitB.hbs >> | | |------unitB.json >> | | `------unitB.js >> | |-------unitC >> | |-------unitD >> | `-------unitN >> | >> `-----jaggery.conf >> >> The above app can have "N" number of units or sharable components(e.g. >> unitA) in a flat hierarchy.We can allow developer to categorize them in a >> logical manner. >> >> app >> | >> |-----pages >> | |----index.hbs >> | |----about.hbs >> | `----login.hbs >> | >> |-----layouts >> | >> |-----*units* >> | | >> | |-----*categoryA *<---a logical category that >> organizes unitA and unitB >> | | | >> | | |------*unitA *<--\ ___ organized units >> | | `------*unitB *<--/ >> | | |------public >> | | | |----images >> | | | |-----js >> | | | `-----css >> | | | >> | | |------unitB.hbs >> | | |------unitB.json >> | | `------unitB.js >> | |-------unitC >> | |-------unitD >> | `-------unitN <---unorganized units >> | >> `-----jaggery.conf >> >> For the above requirement I tried; modifying "fuse.js" and I could >> achieve allowing "N" number of sub-categories for the sharable >> components/units. It identifies a subcategory with absent of a "unit >> definition file" inside the folder. In other words; if it is a "category" >> it should not contain a "<category>.json" inside. >> >> The following scenario is also possible. >> >> |-----units >> | >> `-----categoryA >> | >> |------categoryAb >> | | >> | `-----unitAb >> `------unitA >> >> >> Hope this will be beneficial for future development efforts as well. >> >> Note: MDM guys can try this out-of the box. I have attached modified >> fuse.js[1] and git diff[2]. Small modification needed for this to run >> correctly; inside your MDM app; bootstrap unit should have a >> "bootstrap.json"; otherwise it will be taken as a "unit category". >> >> Thank you >> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Prabath Abeysekera <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Ruchira, >>> >>> I'd really appreciate if you can review the requirements posted above >>> and assign someone to get this implemented soon, since this going to be a >>> very critical functionality for us. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Prabath >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Srinath Perera <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 We need this. >>>> >>>> --Srinath >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Manuranga Perera <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Prabath, >>>>> >>>>> +1 to implement this. currently as a workaround Dulitha is prefixing >>>>> units by a common prefix but this not a very strong workaround. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> With regards, >>>>> *Manu*ranga Perera. >>>>> >>>>> phone : 071 7 70 20 50 >>>>> mail : [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Architecture mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ============================ >>>> Srinath Perera, Ph.D. >>>> http://people.apache.org/~hemapani/ >>>> http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Prabath Abeysekara >>> Technical Lead >>> WSO2 Inc. >>> Email: [email protected] >>> Mobile: +94774171471 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Architecture mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> With Regards, >> >> *Rasika Perera* >> Software Engineer >> M: +94 71 680 9060 E: [email protected] >> LinkedIn: http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rasika90 >> >> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com >> lean.enterprise.middleware >> > > > > -- > With regards, > *Manu*ranga Perera. > > phone : 071 7 70 20 50 > mail : [email protected] > -- With Regards, *Rasika Perera* Software Engineer M: +94 71 680 9060 E: [email protected] LinkedIn: http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rasika90 WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com lean.enterprise.middleware
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
